There is an interesting free speech case emerging in Cleburne Texas where Aaron Urbanski was arrested after protesting in front of the St. Mark United Methodist Church against its Christmas event. Urbanski, 31, was screaming that Santa is not real and was arrested for criminal trespass. It was a remarkably obnoxious and disrespectful act by Urbanski and other protesters, but much will depend on where the protest was held in front of the church. If the arrests were due to the content of the protests rather than its location, a serious free speech issue could emerge. For this part, Cleburne Mayor Scott Cain simply declared “Don’t mess with Santa” — a statement that could be cited by the defendant in a first amendment challenge to his arrest.

We previously discussed the courageous stand of my alma mater, University of Chicago, against the growing speech codes and “safe spaces” in campuses around the country. Purdue University also took a stand in favor of free speech in adopting “the Chicago principles.” Now, Christopher Newport University (a university that I have long admired) has joined the ranks of free speech institutions with its own statement rejecting speech controls and regulations. The statement below states that “Although the University greatly values civility, and although all members of the University community share in the responsibility for maintaining a climate of mutual respect, concerns about civility and mutual respect can never be used as a justification for closing off discussion of ideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to some members of our community.” Bravo CNU Bravo.

We have been discussing the often inconsistent approach taken to controversial statements or postings of students and faculty at our universities and colleges. The latest such case involves Rutgers University history professor James Livingston, who stated in a post that he hated all white people and wanted them out of his neighborhood. The school has now cleared him of all wrongdoing and that is a victory for free speech. However, it is not clear if the same result would have occurred if the content of the hateful message were directed at blacks or minorities. The concern is the inconsistency of a content-based approach to such sanctions.

I have been a critic of the alarming criminalizing of speech in Great Britain through hate speech laws. Such laws create an insatiable appetite for greater and greater speech regulation and create a sense of empowerment among citizens to silence those with whom they disagree. The most recent statistics from the Metropolitan Police for 2015 and 2016 seem to confirm those concerns. The over 2,500 alleged “hate incidents” in just that one jurisdiction show a vast array of everyday gripes being reported as hate crimes from a dog pooping near a house of a disputed tennis match. Hate speech arrests have according to one account risen by 900 percent and now involve thousands of such cases each year. Nine people a day are being detained.

In a truly astounding misstep, the United States Attorney’s Office in Eastern Virginia filed a document that referenced an indictment against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange. The filng in an unrelated court filing seems to confirm that charges are pending or planned against Assange but the Justice Department will only say that “The court filing was made in error.” The charges would raise serious first amendment questions over whether it is a crime to publish hacked emails if you were not a party to the hacking. Wikileaks maintains that it was performing a journalistic function.

A couple of days ago, we discussed the prospect of CNN suing the Trump Administration over the suspension of CNN’s Jim Acosta’s press credentials after a flair up in a former press conference with President Donald Trump and the refusal of Acosta to surrender the microphone. CNN has now filed its lawsuit and it is basically the claims that we anticipated with one addition: a claim that the move violated the Administrative Procedure Act. As I have said from the outset, I strongly oppose the move by the White House, even though I feel that Acosta went too far in the press conference. However, I still remain a bit more cautious than many commentators on what is being described as a slam dunk of a case. Continue reading “CNN Files Challenge To Suspension Of Acosta’s Press Access”→

We have seen an increase in physical assaults on campuses in the last few years as some students and professors seek to harass or silence those with opposing views. The latest example comes with the criminal battery charge filed against FSU student Shelby Anne Shoup. She was captured on videotape as they threw chocolate milk on conservative students and kicked over a sign for Ron DeSantis. Notably, it was the FSU police who made the arrest. Notably, we also discussed a poll today showing that one out of three college students believe that violence is justified to stop what they consider to be hate speech. The incident raises a tough question whether such an offense warrants a criminal charge, though it is possible for a court to allow an expungement for some types of misdemeanors in the case of first offenders.

I recently wrote about the growing controversy over Halloween costumes on campuses and beyond over allegations of cultural appropriation. Various colleges have cracked down on costumes deemed inappropriate or insulting or culturally appropriating. There is little consideration of the free speech concerns over such regulations or the differing views of cultural appropriations theories. There is little question that many of these costumes are insulting and inappropriate. The question is the role of universities in policing good taste and punishing those students who fail to meet often ambiguous standards. The latest such controversy of students facing discipline can be found at the College of Charleston where members of the softball team cross the line of the Halloween etiquette.